what coding would you give

[Doomed]

Outside walls with IP23 lights that even a short person like me can touch. (sign lights)
What coding would you give? I would be tempted with a C2 but these are recently fitted lights by a professional design company on the outside of a public use building, they couldn't of made such an error could they?
Makes me doubt myself sometimes.

 

[littlespark]

Equipment not chosen for IP suitability? Or however it’s worded.
Akin to a simple lampholder in a bathroom where it should be a sealed fitting.

C3 for improvement. C2 if they’re starting to decay badly already. (Photos)

 

[bill01803]

IPx3 = Protected from water spray less than 60 degrees from vertical.
Is it raining up hill where you are?

 

[brianmoooore]

It's long been my opinion that the IP rating system regarding water ingress is far from suitable for the UK. It totally fails to take into account the typical UK sideways misty rain that effectively manages to fall upwards.

 

[pirate]

For those of us who live in Glasgow, it has been a long established fact that it "rains up in Aberdeen"...

 

[littlespark]

I’m still fighting over a roof on my extension that “only leaks when it’s raining and windy”

That’s some IP rating!

Wasn’t noticed until 4 months after completion, then has leaked at least once a year.
All those storms in the past 6 months hasn’t helped, and the roofer is blanking my calls

 

[snowhead]

I would be tempted with a C2 but these are recently fitted lights by a professional design company on the outside of a public use building, they couldn't of made such an error could they?
Makes me doubt myself sometimes.

Anyone can make mistakes, in the world of engineering some huge blunders have been made by experts.
However it quite often involves a string of small errors, like design changes, where no-one stands back and re looks at the whole project.

Maybe the designers specced the light without checking the I.P and the installers said if that's what they want, that's what we'll fit.

Are you certain they are IP23?

 

[snowhead]

I’m still fighting over a roof on my extension that “only leaks when it’s raining and windy”

And I bet you only see the water if you look for it.

 

[i=p/u]

C2 for me as the inspector, people may question it, but it's not wrong.

 

[Doomed]

Anyone can make mistakes, in the world of engineering some huge blunders have been made by experts.
However it quite often involves a string of small errors, like design changes, where no-one stands back and re looks at the whole project.

Maybe the designers specced the light without checking the I.P and the installers said if that's what they want, that's what we'll fit.

Are you certain they are IP23?

They still have the sticker saying IP23 on them

 

[Doomed]

 

[i=p/u]

If says ip23, you know what todo, light not suitable for environment c2

 

[westward10]

A lot of those swan neck sign lights are IP23. Where are you seeing a Code 2 if any Code aside from the fact they are suffering corrosion damage because they are tat.

 

[i=p/u]

Il decide as the inspector westward.. ip44 for as minimum outside for me..

 

[westward10]

Il decide as the inspector westward.. ip44 for as minimum outside for me..

What are you basing that upon because manufacturers of this style of luminare may be interested.

 

[James]

Why is IP23 not suitable for the location?

 

[littlespark]

Well corroded, whatever IP rating it says it has.

 

[James]

Well corroded, whatever IP rating it says it has.

Devils advocate says,
surface corrosion not affecting the structure or ip rating of the fitting.

 

[brianmoooore]

The only way you can condemn that fitting is to do an IR test after a day of misty rain, when it's not been turned on.

 

[Doomed]

See this is where I'm conflicted, to me the IP ratings suggest that 23 would not be suitable for long term outdoor use (in this climate), but the manufacturers have seemingly designed this as an outdoor light.

and yet later today went to fit some IP 45 lights in a soffit and got this:

 

[Doomed]

Now if I had a bathroom where I could touch an exposed 240V lamp I would C2 the fitting, yet these lights we can't decide on.

C3 if out of reach, C2 for low level.
I dunno, going to sleep on it.

 

[i=p/u]

No need to get too technical on this, ip44 would be a must for me. And if you relating back to the early 90s where they aresimilar to social housing back door lights etc, well times have changed.

If he doesn't say anything, the next spark will.

 

[brianmoooore]

You can code them C2 for not being suitable for the environment, if that is your professional judgement (it would be mine), but you cannot code them C2 because they are only IPX3, unless they are in an extremely exposed place, because you cannot reasonably expect rain to fall at an angle of greater than 60 degrees to the vertical.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Section 714 Outdoor lighting installations

714.512.2.105 Electrical equipment shall have, by construction or by installation, a degree of protection of at least IP33.

However,

714.1 The following are excluded:
(v) Luminaires fixed to the outside of a building and supplied directly from the internal wiring of that building

 

[westward10]

Now if I had a bathroom where I could touch an exposed 240V lamp I would C2 the fitting, yet these lights we can't decide on.

C3 if out of reach, C2 for low level.
I dunno, going to sleep on it.

Can you implement 'out of reach' as a measure of protection?
What reason is there to Code them what is the danger.

 

[westward10]

No need to get too technical on this, ip44 would be a must for me. And if you relating back to the early 90s where they aresimilar to social housing back door lights etc, well times have changed.

If he doesn't say anything, the next spark will.

What you would and wouldn't do is something you can't apply.

 

[Doomed]

Can you implement 'out of reach' as a measure of protection?
What reason is there to Code them what is the danger.

This is where regulations meet commen sense, if the fitting is lighting up the signs at first floor level (like most of them are) then fine, you need at least a ladder to reach them and therefore should know what your doing and at least wont be stood in a puddle of rain water.
The low level ones where a bored 12 year old could fiddle with and unscrew the lamp during a thunderstorm make me ponder the safety of it.
At which point I'm drifting into risk assessment rather them electrical testing.
Which I think I will do with this situation, rather then list it and code it I will detail it in the additional notes.

 

[westward10]

This is where regulations meet commen sense, if the fitting is lighting up the signs at first floor level (like most of them are) then fine, you need at least a ladder to reach them and therefore should know what your doing and at least wont be stood in a puddle of rain water.
The low level ones where a bored 12 year old could fiddle with and unscrew the lamp during a thunderstorm make me ponder the safety of it.
At which point I'm drifting into risk assessment rather them electrical testing.
Which I think I will do with this situation, rather then list it and code it I will detail it in the additional notes.

Do you apply this to any exposed lamp holder which have an exclusion when it comes to exposed live parts.

 

[Doomed]

Do you apply this to any exposed lamp holder which have an exclusion when it comes to exposed live parts.

No, in a domestic setting little Timmy I see as the responsibility of its parents, in, say, a rental I may be more concerned about some wall lights.
In a commercial personally I think we should plan for the severely daft, there are some real morons around and they will try to blame others for their stupidity, but once again its how to frame this in the regulations that we have to follow.
(I never should of done that course on risk assessment)

When I was young and a complete arse I spent a few hours re-arranging the coloured lights from the fairy lights at a coastal resort into colour groups instead of alternating colours, this was back in the 240V no RCD days, no thought for the risks involved, just being a complete Timmy, I was the sort of person that we have to protect from themselves.

 

[westward10]

No, in a domestic setting little Timmy I see as the responsibility of its parents, in, say, a rental I may be more concerned about some wall lights.
In a commercial personally I think we should plan for the severely daft, there are some real morons around and they will try to blame others for their stupidity, but once again its how to frame this in the regulations that we have to follow.
(I never should of done that course on risk assessment)

When I was young and a complete arse I spent a few hours re-arranging the coloured lights from the fairy lights at a coastal resort into colour groups instead of alternating colours, this was back in the 240V no RCD days, no thought for the risks involved, just being a complete Timmy, I was the sort of person that we have to protect from themselves.

There is no difference Regulations don't state a location difference.